See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/237188711

Fazlur Khan (1929 1982): reflections on his life and works

Article in Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering · February 2011

DOI: 10.1139/l01-092

CITATIONS READS
3 12,972

2 authors, including:

Aftab Mufti
University of Manitoba
236 PUBLICATIONS 2,539 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Aftab Mufti on 21 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

238

Fazlur Khan (1929–1982): reflections on his life

and works
Aftab A. Mufti and Baidar Bakht

Abstract: Tall buildings, or skyscrapers, are icons of cities, symbols of corporate power, and a mark of national pride.
Certain skyscrapers, such as the John Hancock Center and the Sears Tower in Chicago, are also marvels of engineering
that have paved the way for ever increasing heights of structural systems. Since the 1960s, a series of new structural
systems has been introduced with the objective of achieving economically-competitive and aesthetically-pleasing tall
buildings without compromising safety. One of the great structural engineers responsible for the new structural systems
was Dr. Fazlur Rahman Khan. This paper provides a biographical sketch of Dr. Khan and discusses some of his innova-
tions pertaining to high-rise buildings. It shows that his contributions led to a new vertical scale for the modern day city.
Key words: aesthetics, architecture, innovation, structural system, tall building.

Résumé : Les grands édifices, ou gratte-ciel, sont l’emblème des villes, la manifestation symbolique des puissances
corporatives, et sont représentatifs de la fierté nationale. Certains gratte-ciel, comme le Centre John Hancock et la Tour
Sears à Chicago, sont aussi des merveilles d’ingénierie qui ont pavé la voie à des systèmes structuraux atteignant des
hauteurs toujours plus grandes. Depuis les années 60, une série de nouveaux systèmes structuraux a été introduite, avec
pour objectif la réalisation de grands édifices compétitifs économiquement et plaisants esthétiquement, sans compro-
mettre la sécurité. L’un des grands ingénieurs en structures responsables de ces nouveaux systèmes structuraux est
Dr Fazlur Rahman Khan. Cet article présente un aperçu biographique de Dr Khan et discute quelques-unes de ces in-
novations se rattachant aux gratte-ciel. L’article montre que sa contribution a mené à une nouvelle échelle verticale
pour nos villes modernes.
Mots clés : esthétique, architecture, innovation, systèmes structuraux, grand édifice.

[Traduit par la Rédaction] Mufti and Bakht 245

Introduction framing system, providing an economical way to construct

There are three distinct phases in the development of sky-
scrapers. The first phase occurred in the late 1800s in re-
sponse to city growth and can be regarded as an economic
phenomenon. The buildings in this phase were generally no
more than six storeys. Taller buildings were not favoured,
primarily because of the lack of a vertical transportation sys-
tem.
The roots of the second phase were planted in 1855, when
Otis demonstrated his invention of the elevator system, and
the lack of a vertical transportation system no longer put a
limitation on building heights. Around the same time, cast
iron replaced stone, bricks, and timber as the construction
material of choice, and this was soon replaced by steel. With
the change in construction materials, the structural system
evolved from masonry bearing walls into a beam–column
Received 26 February 2001. Revised manuscript accepted
6 December 2001. Published on the NRC Research Press
Web site at http://cjce.nrc.ca on 19 March 2002.
A.A. Mufti.1 ISIS Canada, The University of Manitoba,
Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6, Canada.
B. Bakht. JMBT Structures Research Inc., Toronto,
ON M1V 3G1, Canada.
Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be
received by the Editor until 31 August 2002.
1
Corresponding author (e-mail: muftia@cc.umanitoba.ca).
tall buildings.
Although the technology was available to build “skyscrap-
ers”, actual application and construction using these new de-
velopments had to wait until after the Civil War. By that
time, stronger sentiments of American identity led to the re-
jection of what was seen as “imported” European styles. En-
gineers and architects, like le Baron Jenny and Sullivan, took
the lead in establishing what is now known as the First Chi-
cago School of Architecture, paving the way for the creation
of a unique American style of design architecture.
In phase two of the evolution of tall buildings, 20- to
30-storey buildings became a common sight on the Ameri-
can city skyline. Aesthetics were derived from the utilitarian
qualities of the buildings, and although the advent of the
structural steel frame was seen as new and innovative build-
ing technology, it also bore witness to the end of large-scale
monolithic masonry construction. The height of these build-
ings was excessively large compared to the width of the ma-
jor streets, thus leading to the loss of a human scale
relationship with the height of the building. These tall build-
ings also blocked sunlight and air at the street level.
Constructing buildings taller than the norm of the day us-
ing beam–column structural frames with masonry infill
proved too expensive. So this phase of growth, which lasted
until 1950, generally saw 20- to 30-storey buildings, al-
though there were notable exceptions such as the Empire
State Building.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 29: 238–245 (2002) DOI: 10.1139/L01-092 © 2002 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:06 AM
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Mufti and Bakht
By the 1960s, the third phase in the construction of high-
rise buildings was under way. In this phase a whole new se-
ries of structural systems were developed with the objective
of eliminating the traditional premium for resisting lateral
loads. These new structural systems, using structural steel,
reinforced concrete, and traditional masonry, have evolved to
such an extent that buildings up to a hundred or more stor-
eys are now economically feasible.
This third phase in the evolution of the tall building is due
mainly to the genius of Dr. Fazlur Rahman Khan, who was
not only an outstanding structural engineer but also a highly
innovative person. This paper is devoted to remembering this
great structural engineer by reviewing some of his work.
Dr. Fazlur Rahman Khan’s portrait, appearing on a postage
stamp of Bangladesh, is presented in Fig. 1.
Biographical synopsis
Fazlur Rahman Khan was born 3 April 1929 in East Ben-
gal in undivided India. The city of his birth, Dhaka, is now
in Bangladesh and was previously in East Pakistan. Standing
first in his class, Khan received his Bachelor of Engineering
from the University of Dhaka in 1950; he taught for two
years in Dhaka and then went to the University of Illinois on
a Fulbright and a Pakistani scholarship. He completed two
masters degrees, one in theoretical and applied mechanics
and the other in structural engineering. In 1955, he did his
doctorate in structural engineering under the supervision of
Professor C.P. Seis. Immediately after obtaining his doctor-
ate degree, Khan started working with Skidmore, Owings
and Merril (SOM), architects and engineers in Chicago. In
1957 he returned to Pakistan to fulfill the terms of his schol-
arship.
By 1958, the Pakistani civilian government was deposed
by military rule. As he recalled later, Khan was offered a di-
rectorship of Pakistan’s Building Research Centre that was
soon withdrawn. It is very likely that the free spirit of Khan
was greatly affected by the authoritarian rule in Pakistan at
the time. During an interview with Civil Engineering —
ASCE he recalled, probably ruefully, that “there was a polit-
ical deal going on” (Morrison 1980).
Khan stayed in Dhaka doing private design work, then
went to work for the Karachi Development Authority for a
period of time.
In 1960, Khan decided to return to SOM in Chicago. Dur-
ing the same interview cited above, he rationalized his return
to the U.S.A.: “Once you are educated in America, you be-
come accustomed to a very sophisticated approach to engi-
neering. I missed the level of technology, the excitement of
the responsibility I was given, and the scale of projects
there”.
From his return to Chicago until his death in 1982, Khan
designed a number of buildings, including some of the tall-
est in the world. His approach to tall building design was
new and innovative. Khan had mastered his craft of struc-
tural engineering academically and in practical application,
but excellence in technical understanding was only a part of
his genius. As he put it, “the social and visual impact of
buildings is really my motivation for searching out new
structural systems”, and to get the right visual impact, “a
building’s natural strength should be expressed”.
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:18 AM
239
Fig. 1. Portrait of Dr. Fazlur Rahman Khan on a Bangladeshi
postage stamp.
In a symposium organized by the American Society of
Civil Engineers (1983) to honour the works of Khan, Profes-
sors Billington and Goldsmith (1983) remembered Khan as a
man who used his rich imagination to “create new forms for
buildings” joining a class of new forms like those created by
Maillart for bridges and by Nervi for vaults.
Khan was cited three times by the Engineering News Re-
cord (ENR) as one of the “Men who served the best interests
of the construction industry”. He was presented with the
“Chicagoan of the year” award in architecture and civil engi-
neering by the Junior Chamber of Commerce. Khan pub-
lished a large number of technical papers in engineering and
architectural journals and, in 1972, was voted “Construc-
tions’ Man of the year”. He also received the Wason Medal
for the most meritorious paper from ACI in 1971, the Lloyd
Kimbrough Medal from AISC in 1973, and the Oscar Faber
Medal from the Institution of Structural Engineers, London,
in 1973. He received honorary Doctorate degrees from North
Western University (1973), Lehigh University (1980), and
Die Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule (1980).
Khan lived in a high-rise apartment with his wife Liselotte
and his daughter Yasmin. His untimely death on 27 March
1982 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, at the age of 52 deprived the
structural engineering profession of an outstanding innova-
tor. In paying tribute to Fazlur Khan, the Engineering News
Record editor wrote: “His structures will stand for years, and
his ideas will never die”.
Engineer, innovator, philosopher
Khan’s physical appreciation for the way structures be-
have was so good, he could explain intricate technical prob-
lems in terms so simple that even a layman could
understand. Khan realized that as buildings become taller
their design is governed by their resistance to lateral loads,
i.e., those due to wind and earthquakes. The premium cost of
constructing buildings to resist these lateral loads is illus-
trated in chart form, as reproduced in Fig. 2.
© 2002 NRC Canada
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
240
Fig. 2. Cost premium for height is largely due to lateral loads.
Iyengar (1997) credits Khan for realizing that different
structural forms are economically and structurally suitable
for high-rise buildings with different heights. His much-cited
charts are reproduced in Figs. 3 and 4 for steel and concrete
construction, respectively. It is noted that Khan kept chang-
ing these charts, albeit slightly. Khan concluded that a solu-
tion optimized on the basis of economy and function must
also be aesthetically pleasing. He felt that buildings should
result in the creation of a better built environment. The
building can only be deemed complete when it is structurally
sound and provides a delightful visual experience.
Both engineering and architectural schools of thought saw
Khan as a structural wizard and an innovator of varied struc-
tural forms. His novel concepts ranged from the Brunswick
Building design to the futuristic 160-storey Megastructure,
which has not yet been built, and from the Baxter Labora-
tory Dining Hall to the “tent” roof for the Haj Terminal.
The 38-storey Brunswick Building was the first reinforced
cement concrete (RCC) building to utilize interaction be-
tween the frame and the shear wall. Consideration of this in-
teraction not only led to economy in design but also reduced
the free shortening of exterior columns in extremely cold
temperatures.
One Shell Plaza was the first application of Khan’s tube-
in-tube concept. In this concept, the outer tube resists the
overturning moments due to lateral loads and the inner tube
resists the shear to achieve a highly efficient structural sys-
tem. The 52-storey One Shell Plaza project used the com-
posite tubular system incorporating the best of both steel and
concrete structural systems. On one hand, the RCC framed
tube is very efficient in resisting horizontal loads, and on the
other, the steel framing scores in height and lightness.
One Magnificent Mile and the Sears Tower are based on
the concept of bundled tubes. In this concept, integrated
framed tubes act together as one tube sharing common side
frames. By bundling the tubes, there is an increase in the lat-
eral stiffness and stability of the building.
Khan’s appreciation of aesthetics, space, and form com-
bined with his technical expertise helped make him the only
partner at SOM that was an engineer and not an architect.
His theory was to expose the natural beauty of the structure
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:19 AM
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 29, 2002
rather than hide it behind a contrived facade. Like Ruskin,
Khan believed in the concept that “architecture is mother of
all art”. In the same vein, he believed that structural engi-
neering is more than a rational application of science.
Although he was a master of the craft of structural engi-
neering, he was always of the opinion that “a technical man
shouldn’t be lost in his technology”. He also philosophized
that besides technicalities, a man should take some time to
enjoy and appreciate life, music, and drama. He could dis-
cuss, intelligently, many topics besides engineering with the
same ease he exercised explaining the intricacies of novel
structural systems. Khan was not a physically towering pres-
ence, standing at just 1.70 m, but his sprightly and purpose-
ful walk and his way of getting things done with
overwhelming casualness underscored his strength of pur-
pose and confidence. Khan had such an incredible passion
for work, for creating new structural systems and finding
new ways to economize the total cost of the structure that he
used to work even on weekends. He traveled extensively, of-
ten from one continent to another. The travel never tired him
because he enjoyed his work so much. Because Khan had
such a keen perception for architecture and engineering, he
could bridge the gap between the concepts of structural form
and aesthetics of tall buildings.
Khan worked his entire career in the U.S.A. at Skidmore,
Owings and Merril (SOM) in Chicago, collaborating closely
with architect Bruce Graham. Together they completed sev-
eral notable and innovative projects. Throughout his profes-
sional career, Khan also worked closely with students at the
Illinois Institute of Technology. “Khan feels that teaching is
a very important part of his professional life, the work with
students helps stimulate new ideas and concepts, as well as
think them through” (Fisher 1972).
According to Khan, where tremendous forces must follow
the structural form, logic and scientific method should pre-
vail within the broad framework of art and architecture. The
need to work as a team in the early formulation of the build-
ing design is known as a necessity in all building construc-
tion, but Khan believed that this need was even more
important in the design of ultra-complex buildings such as
the Sears Tower. According to Khan, every professional
© 2002 NRC Canada
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Mufti and Bakht
Fig. 3. Categories of steel structural systems for high-rise buildings.
Fig. 4. Categories of concrete structural systems for high-rise buildings.
working on complex problems involved in the design of tall
buildings needs to realize the impact that his propositions
will have on the other members of the team. Building sys-
tems are not independent, but rather they are interrelated
from the foundation systems to the construction systems. As
such, even in this age of specialization, everyone needs to
understand and appreciate this interrelationship of the multi-
tude of systems from the very beginning of the project.
Bruce Graham said, “Faz has an extremely rare understand-
ing of architecture. In every phase of a project, we work on
alternatives. He even gets involved in interiors and floor
planning”.
There are at least five aspects of Khan’s career that de-
serve special attention. First, his achievements are unlikely
to have been so remarkable without sensitive collaboration
with some outstanding architects. The fact that he was able
to find time from his full-time job to teach part time and to
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:20 AM
241
conduct research at a university was a second aspect. The
third aspect is identified as the number of extraordinary en-
gineering collaborators who likely helped Khan in defining
various structural systems for tall buildings. Khan’s vision
of structures as works of art is a distinct fourth aspect to his
career. The fifth aspect of his career was wholeness.
A man of distinction, unique ability, and wholeness, Khan
was truly an open-minded man. He was brought up in Is-
lamic tradition and culture and loved and respected the best
of all other traditions and cultures that he was exposed to.
He was known to be benevolent. The 1970 civil war between
East and West Pakistan followed a bitter and bloody civil
uprising in East Pakistan that led to the cessation of East Pa-
kistan and to the formation of Bangladesh. As a native of
Bengal, Khan could understandably have been bitter towards
West Pakistan and its people. He may have suffered in sad-
ness but is never known to have condemned the people of
© 2002 NRC Canada
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

242 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 29, 2002

West Pakistan. He was “a whole person”, as Lynn Beedle Fig. 5. Deformations under uniformly distributed lateral loads:
noted in his lecture at the ASCE (1983) fall meeting. A (a) isolated frame and (b) isolated shear wall.
singer of songs of Bengali Nobel laureate Tagore, and lis-
tener of the music of Bach and Brahms, he was truly a mod-
ern renaissance man of Islamic civilization.

Innovative structural systems

Khan was able to develop a number of innovative struc-
tural systems because of his appreciation for the traditional
concept that the union of architecture and engineering is es-
sential for the synthesis of form and function. The First Chi-
cago School, noted earlier, flourished under the leadership of
Sullivan and Jenny. Mies Vander Rohe led the Second
School. Vander Rohe designed one of the most beautiful and
efficient buildings in Chicago, the Lake Shore Drive Apart-
ment Towers. Notwithstanding the remarkable achievements
before the 1960s, the height of high-rise buildings could not
exceed much beyond 20 or 30 storeys for economic reasons.
Simply put, the cost of resisting lateral loads was too great
(Khan 1973, as shown in Fig. 2). To overcome this economic
limitation on height, Khan developed six novel systems in
steel structures, and four in concrete. These systems have
been identified in Figs. 3 and 4.
The first novel concept, explained in a number of techni-
cal papers by Khan, was based on utilizing the beneficial in-
teraction between rigid frames and shear walls or trusses. As
illustrated in Figs. 5a and 5b, the deformations of a tall rigid
frame under uniformly distributed lateral loads have a dis-
tinctly different pattern from those of the shear wall or truss
under similar loads. The shear wall responds predominantly
to shear forces and the truss to mainly bending moments. A
combination of the two structural components leads to a
highly efficient system, in which the frame carries a larger
portion of the lateral loads in the upper portion of the build-
ing, and the shear wall or truss resists a larger portion of the
lateral loads in the lower portion.
Khan (1966) noted that the use of shear walls in buildings
taller than 20 storeys is imperative from the point of view of
economy. For such buildings, the consideration of the inter-
action between the frame and the shear wall is also impera-
tive. The innovation of combining the frame with shear
trusses or walls allowed Khan to design buildings up to 40
storeys high without paying excessive price for the height. It
was a simple but extraordinary finding. After Khan utilized
it, this interaction became a standard feature for 20- to 40-
storey buildings constructed in steel or concrete or both.
As Khan described in his characteristically modest way,
“it was almost accidental that, in 1961, the author, working
together with his architectural partner, Bruce Graham, stum-
bled on the idea of a hollow thin-walled tube with punched
holes as the basic exterior of buildings” (Khan 1973). It can
be appreciated readily that by reducing the spacing of exte-
rior columns, the entire system of beams and columns lying
on the external perimeter of a building can be made to act as
a perforated tube, or a framed tube (Fig. 6).
Khan recognized the efficiency of a framed tube cantile-
ver with its base fixed in the ground. As illustrated in Fig. 7,
a framed tube under lateral loads has its columns on the load
face in tension and those on the opposite face in compres-
sion, thus eliminating bending of individual columns. Once
again, it was a simple idea with a profound impact on the
design of tall buildings. Khan recognized many practical
planning and architectural difficulties in tying all the col-
umns of the building together. His solution within the archi-
tectural framework of the rectangular windows was to place
exterior columns fairly close to each other so that the
column–beam interaction resulted in an optimum design. A
larger or smaller spacing of columns would lead to an ineffi-
cient solution. Khan recognized that the frame tube concept
loses some of its efficiency as a result of the shear lag effect,
also illustrated in Fig. 7. The shear lag effect, being similar
to that encountered in top flanges of T-beams, is not signifi-
cant in buildings up to 80 storeys high.
Application of a novel structural system to
a tall building
It is remarkable that in his relatively short life of 52 years,
Khan was able to develop many innovations and apply them
to actual structures. In this short paper, we have chosen to
discuss only one of his buildings, the John Hancock Center,
Chicago, Illinois, the world’s tallest multi-use steel building
based on the truss tube concept.
John Hancock Center
The 100-storey John Hancock Center is “gutsy, masculine
and industrial; reflecting the tradition of Chicago where
structure is of the essence” (Graham 1980). It is a dominant
structure on the imposing Chicago skyline. Initially it was
highly controversial. Sculptor Claes Oldenburg compared it
with “The Statue of Death” by Lorado Tuft in Chicago’s
Graceland Cemetery. The statue, wrote Oldenburg, “has a
shape like the Hancock building, and the Hancock building
resembles the black slab against which the sculpture stands”.
He called the building a “funeral structure” and was “resent-
ful of its scale”. In due course, the building was accepted as
a beautiful object and became a landmark for the city and a
notable step in the development of architecture and struc-
© 2002 NRC Canada

I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:21 AM
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Mufti and Bakht
Fig. 6. Frame tube structural system.
tural engineering. Truth and honesty of structural application
make this building an attractive object.
The John Hancock Center was originally designed as two
separate buildings: one for residential use and the other for
office space, as shown in Fig. 8a. This scheme was fraught
with a number of difficulties: the blockage of natural light,
little public space, and blocked view lines, all common prob-
lems in densely populated American city centres. As he
noted in 1982, Khan disliked the two-tower solution: “the
rather mundane solution based on the program for the pro-
ject would have also created a sense of congestion at the site
and enhanced the canyon character so disliked in many of
the urban centres of the industrial world”. Khan and Graham
began to search for other alternative solutions and came up
with the concept of a single 100- storey building, shown
schematically in Fig. 8b.
Building shape
The tapering form for the John Hancock Center was a nat-
ural outcome of spatial needs. Since the upper floors were
designated residential, they required a smaller floor space
than the office floors below. Another benefit of tapering the
structure was that it created a smaller surface area at the
higher levels, thus reducing the wind load. The structure
comprises visible diagonal bracing on its exposed faces. The
diagonal bracing diminishes in size as the building rises,
thus exaggerating the perspective. This effect, combined
with the tapering shape, makes the building appear taller
than it actually is. The diagonal form also contributes to the
sculptural elegance of the space within. Both the architect
and the owner wanted to remove the cross bracing above the
90th floor to allow for “purer and unobstructed views”.
Khan felt it would be a tragedy to discontinue the diagonals
and finally convinced Bruce Graham and the owner to carry
the diagonals through the entire height of the building.
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:22 AM
243
Fig. 7. Load distribution in columns of a framed tube.
It is worth recalling the arguments Khan put forth to
Bruce Graham and the owner: “However, at the end, the au-
thor made an impassioned argument that not having the di-
agonal on the upper ten floors would add a tremendous
amount of additional steel to the building, the cost would
skyrocket and it might, in fact, be too flexible causing mo-
tion discomfort on those floors. This argument finally won
out and the diagonals in the upper ten floors were put back”
(Khan 1982). It is interesting that the honesty of structural
and architectural expression of this landmark building would
have been compromised if Khan had not given his argu-
ments in purely engineering and economic terms.
The appearance of this building is perceived in a variety of
ways. Architecture critics have referred to it as structural mega-
lomania, and others have praised the honesty of its appearance.
These opinions represent two sides of the same coin, because
both express reaction to the building’s aesthetics, which, in this
case, is created solely by its structural system.
Structural system
As noted earlier, Khan developed the “framed tube” con-
cept and used it to design tall buildings. But even this con-
cept was not suitable for concrete buildings higher than
about 50 storeys and for steel buildings of more than
80 storeys. In taller buildings, the shear lag phenomenon, il-
lustrated in Fig. 7, causes the columns near the corners of
the building to attract most of the lateral loads. This trend
can be changed by stiffening the exterior frames, e.g., by di-
agonal bracing. Khan introduced the diagonals in the John
Hancock building to improve the efficiency of the structure.
Khan wrote: “The use of diagonal members to correct the far
spaced columns makes the diagonal members themselves act
also as columns and therefore they do not normally develop
any tension stresses, even under the influence of full wind
load. Because these diagonals act both as inclined members,
as well as taking a major portion of the wind shear, the effi-
ciency of the structural system generally is very high for tall
buildings” (Khan 1973).
The structure of the John Hancock Center was analyzed
by Khan et al. (1966) under lateral wind loads with the ide-
alization shown in Fig. 9a. The column axial stresses ob-
tained by these analyses are reproduced in Fig. 9b. It can be
seen in this figure that all columns on the face exposed to
© 2002 NRC Canada
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
244
Fig. 8. Architectural concepts for the John Hancock Center: (a) initial design and (b) final design.
Fig. 9. Column axial stress distribution in truss tube: (a) ideal-
ized structure and (b) axial forces on exterior columns in quarter
structure.
wind carry nearly the same axial force, thus confirming that
the effect of shear lag is virtually eliminated by the introduc-
tion of the diagonals.
The structure of the John Hancock Center is referred to as
a truss tube, the use of which is justified for only super tall
buildings such as the one under consideration.
Aesthetic considerations and engineer–architect
interaction
One of the great triumphs of this building, called the “Big
John” in Chicago, is that it was created by the collaboration
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:22 AM
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 29, 2002
of an engineer and an architect. As mentioned, Fazlur Khan
and Bruce Graham both worked for SOM in their Chicago
office. SOM was founded on the concepts of Mies Vander
Rohe, the founder of the Second Chicago School of Archi-
tecture. One of the main concepts of the school and SOM
was that a true architectural aesthetic form must express the
nature of itself, or rather the building that is creating it. It is
not surprising that SOM was open to the concept of a struc-
tural system being used as the basis of aesthetic expression.
A quote of Khan referring to the design of the Hancock
building is relevant: “It was an economic problem at first.
Bruce said, ‘If you create a structure, we’ll make architec-
ture out of it’”. This quote underscores the fact that Graham
did not have preconceived notions about the shape of the
building. Such interaction between an engineer and an archi-
tect is contrary to the usual practice where the architect de-
cides the shape of the building, and the engineer ensures that
the building stands up.
Similar to the Eiffel Tower, the John Hancock Center has
become a symbol of the beauty of structure. Its whole ap-
pearance is dominated by the cross bracing and the large ex-
terior columns. The building appears like a giant black
obelisk placed in the middle of the city. It is an imposing
structure. For some, it creates a feeling of strength and secu-
rity, while for others it might produce unease because of its
massive size.
In the tradition of Mies Vander Rohe’s Second Chicago
School of Architecture, the John Hancock Center is an icon
of modern American architecture that owes its appearance
more to an engineer than an architect. Maybe we can see in
this the architecture of the future, where similar to bridges,
the shape of high-rise buildings will be governed by struc-
tural considerations. Will the high-rise building engineer be
regarded as an artist in the same way as great architects and
bridge engineers are recognized?
Conclusions
Undoubtedly, Fazlur Rahman Khan will be remembered
as a great structural designer, innovator, educator, speaker,
© 2002 NRC Canada
Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Mufti and Bakht
and humanist of the 20th Century. His structural ideas have
been incorporated into many tall buildings, including the
tallest of all the buildings in the world, the Sears Tower. It is
fitting that the street sign leading to the Sears Tower is
named “Fazlur R. Khan Way” and a sculpture of Khan,
commissioned by the engineers of Illinois (Pitroski 1999), is
sitting appropriately in the entrance to the Sears Tower
evoking his remarkable qualities.
Trizec owns The Sears Tower. Trizec is a Canadian com-
pany, owned by a successful Canadian businessman and an
engineer, Peter Munk. In a book about his life, Munk says
“If you want to build a skyscraper higher than anyone else,
you’re asking for problems. So when I say I want to build
the highest building, I am challenging fate” (Rumball 1997).
Whether Munk knew Khan or not is not known to the au-
thors, but perhaps Munk is echoing the sentiments of Khan
who dared to challenge the fates when he designed a super
tall structure such as the Sears Tower.
Personal tragedies and vicissitudes of life did not daunt
the spirit of this great man. He continued to work as an engi-
neer and an artist until his untimely death in 1982. Those of
us who are structural engineers are grateful to Fazlur
Rahman Khan for motivating us to aim for heights that
sometimes look impossible to scale.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of stu-
dents of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Daltech, who
took the course ARCH6206 Research Studies in Technology.
Their research reports on the John Hancock Tower, the Sears
Tower, and One Shell Plaza were very beneficial in writing
this paper; these reports are available from the authors. The
authors also wish to gratefully acknowledge the encourage-
ment and help given by Professor D.P. Billington of Prince-
I:\cjce\cjce_29\cjce-02\L01-092.vp
Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:56:23 AM
View publication stats
245
ton University, Professor Lynn S. Beedle of Lehigh
University, and Professor Marie-Anne Erki of the Royal
Military College of Canada.
References
Billington, D.P., and Goldsmith, M. (Editors). 1983. Techniques
and aesthetics in the design of tall buildings. Proceedings of the
Fazlur Rahman Khan Session on Structural Expression in Build-
ings, Annual Fall Meeting of the American Society of Civil En-
gineers, 19 October, Houston, Tex.
Dean, A. 1980. Evaluation: Trussed tube towering over Chicago.
AIA Journal, October, pp. 68–73.
Fisher, R. 1972. Optimizing the structure of a skyscraper. Architec-
tural Record, 10(October): 97–104.
Iyengar, S.H. 1997. Tall building systems for the next century.
Structures in the new millenium. A.A. Balkema Publishers, Rot-
terdam, The Netherlands. pp. 19–30.
Khan, F.R. 1966. On some special problems of analysis and design
of shear wall structures. Proceedings on Tall Buildings, Univer-
sity of Southampton, April, pp. 321–344.
Khan, F.R. 1974. New structural systems for tall buildings and
their scale effects on cities. Proceedings — Tall Building,
Planning, Design and Construction Symposium, November 14–
15, Nashville, Tenn., pp. 99–128.
Khan, F.R. 1982. 100 story John Hancock Center in Chicago — a
case study of the design process. IABSE Journal, 16(82): 27–34.
Khan, F.R., Iyengar, S.H., and Colaco, J.P. 1966. Computer design
of 100-story John Hancock Center. ASCE Journal of Structural
Engineering, 92(ST6): 55–73.
Morrison, A. 1980. Top foreign-born civil engineers speak their
minds. Civil Engineering — ASCE, 50(10): 115–119.
Pitroski, H. 1999. Fazlur Khan, American scientist. Research Tri-
angle Park, January/February.
Rumball, D. 1997. Peter Munk, Canadian modern tycoon. Stoddart
Publishing Co., Toronto, Ont.
© 2002 NRC Canada